We have a new book in the works and it will be introducing social combat to the mix. Below is a quick summary, that may or not be confusing without a larger context. Let me know if it makes sense by itself please.

Social Combat SummaryAnyone can play a Mental (blue) rune to initiate a social attack. It deals 1 social damage (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).The defender has an innate Social defense equal to half their Mental Trait (round up). They may also play a Mental (blue) rune to defend, reducing the Social damage by 1 (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).There are 3 types of attacks:1) Question: try and get the defender to answer a question. If at least 1 damage gets through, then the defender must answer the question.2) Provoke: impose a social condition on the victim. If at least 1 damage gets through then the defender gets 1 intensity of a chosen Social condition (trust, admire, fear, etc).3) Compel: get the defender to do you a favour, so long as it doesn’t contradict their Nature. If at least 1 damage gets through *and* the defender’s Essence bag is empty, then they must do the compelled action(s).Social damage targets the Rune Bag (Essence) and brings the runes down to Stun. At the end of every combat round *all* runes from stun are returned to the Rune Bag (Essence).The defender’s Social defense is lowered by 1 for every piece of critical information (called “strings”) the attacker may know about them (usually already known through the adventure or by using the question social action).If the social attacker or defender have relevant skills or out-of-combat active power effects, and they can convince the Norn of their relevance, then the social attack or defense will gain a bonus +1 (per rank in the skill).Social combat introduces active powers that are social attacks and defenses. Social conditions act as either buffs or de-buffs for social interactions.

The formula for a Social attack is:Social Active power + Mental Trait + Strings + Social items + relevant skill rank + relevant out of combat effect (if not in combat) and then the total could be amplified if the invoker chooses to do so.The formula for a Social defend is:Social Active power + Spiritual Trait + Strings + Social items + relevant skill rank + relevant out of combat effect (if not in combat) and then the total could be amplified if the invoker chooses to do so.

ConditionsConditions will vary based on the system (FOTN or 5e considering our latest bestiary is for both and the system includes both)Social conditions work similarly to classic FOTN conditions, but have a few new particularities such as a single intensity. Some conditions when intensified become a different condition.

FEARIf this condition is intensified, replace it with TERROR- During Upkeep you may pay 1 rune to ignore the effect for 1 combat round.- All actions are Weak actions- You have 2 less PF when resisting a Compel action

TERRORReplaces the Fear condition- All actions are Weak actions- Pay a rune during Upkeep or spend 2 runes fleeing- PF -3 vs Question actions by the combatant causing this condition

Social PowersSocial powers

TRICKY SMALL-TALKPerform a Question Social attack negating 2 Social Defense

DISTURBING LEERPerform a Provoke Social attack with a +1 bonus

BESEECHPerform a Compel action with a +2 bonus if the request does not involve risk

At first glance, this is really neat. This seems like I can either beat someone up physically and then compel them or question them a bunch and then compel them using the knowledge gained to reduce that social armor.

That immediately conjured up images of interrogating NPCs to get some key info, but then I see that compel doesn't go against their nature so it seems that unless they're the sort of person who would tell you the info without the beating, they're not going to tell you after the beating.

I'm curious to see the powers and other things that also add to that social damage

They might, but right now they don't. I'm in the numbers balancing game right now.

dafelsheim wrote:

How do these rules interact with the existing social Skills?

If you have a relevant skill, you can tap into it for an additional success per rank.

dafelsheim wrote:

How do these rules interact with existing social Powers?

Can you give me an example? Are you referring to some social out-of-combat effects? If so, same as skills, if you can rationalize how they help, you can add a +1.

dafelsheim wrote:

Is there any sort of equivalent to "Pierce" for this?

Yes

dafelsheim wrote:

Can we have more information on the Social Conditions? And how do existing Conditions interact with them?

I have a bunch of social conditions, some bad, some good and some in the middle. The goal is to bring the emotional spectrum into the game. Your hero won't be unfeeling. If you lose your thane, you will be struck by the grief condition.

dafelsheim wrote:

Last, how do social combat and normal combat interact together?

The goal is that you can use both at the same time in one unified system. So picture a zoro movie where they fight, but also tant and talk with one another. That's what I aim to achieve with this next RGS evolution.

First of all, your edits to the main post GREATLY clarify things. I mean, before obviously it made sense, from a linguistic stand point, but I'm not sure if that's the input you were looking for. :p

andrew wrote:

Anyone can play a Mental (blue) rune to initiate a social attack. It deals 1 social damage (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).The defender has an innate Social defense equal to half their Mental Trait (round up). They may also play a Mental (blue) rune to defend, reducing the Social damage by 1 (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).

So, social damage is really a completely different, fourth kind of damage, then? Mental, Spiritual, Physical, and Social? Have you thought of how to balance the introduction of Social damage against how the other forms of damage are arrayed in existing publications? For instance, a lot of Powers (Active and Passive) that already exist seem like they would definitely interact with Social damage (list comes later.) Powers that deal with Mental Damage in general seem to do so, thematically, at least.

Oh, and on that note, according to page 85 of the core rulebook, wouldn't Spiritual Runes apply to Social Combat more?

andrew wrote:

Social damage targets the Rune Bag (Essence) and brings the runes down to Stun. At the end of every combat round *all* runes from stun are returned to the Rune Bag (Essence).

What if some Runes in Stun are not from Social damage?

andrew wrote:

The defender’s Social defense is lowered by 1 for every piece of critical information (called “strings”) the attacker may know about them (usually already known through the adventure or by using the question social action).

So this is effectively Pierce?

andrew wrote:

Social combat introduces active powers that are social attacks and defenses. Social conditions act as either buffs or de-buffs for social interactions.

Now, this part I like a lot. I have to admit that I was a little disappointed at how little Skalds could do as far as Powers go, socially-speaking. But that also begs the question.. With Archetype Boards being static, how would any existing Archetypes access such Powers?

This sounds very Burning Wheely/Torchbearery. A player of mine just started running a Torchbearer game a few weeks ago. I really do love the whole innate Nature idea.

andrew wrote:

They might, but right now they don't. I'm in the numbers balancing game right now.

Let me know if you want any aid with that. Everyone in my gaming group have degrees in hard sciences so we can definitely crunch some numbers and do some statistics.

andrew wrote:

If you have a relevant skill, you can tap into it for an additional success per rank.

Wow. This actually sounds very similar to the custom rules I've made for chases/challenges. I'll PM you those!

andrew wrote:

Can you give me an example? Are you referring to some social out-of-combat effects? If so, same as skills, if you can rationalize how they help, you can add a +1.

Well, some examples of Active Powers that would either directly or indirectly (in my estimation) apply to Social Combat-type scenarios:

Analytical Fortress StanceAnalytical Power StanceAura AuguryAny of the Cerebral SpellsDevour ThoughtSome of the HowlsInsulting ParryMask of MockeryMental CelerityPossess OpponentPurging TiradeSoul TransferSpiritual AbortionStitch DestinyStitch KindredVisage of HorrorsBewitchmentDredge the PastUnearthly BeautyWord of CommandMesmerizing GazeMimicryShade of Night and DayShade of Piercing Eyes

andrew wrote:

I have a bunch of social conditions, some bad, some good and some in the middle. The goal is to bring the emotional spectrum into the game. Your hero won't be unfeeling. If you lose your thane, you will be struck by the grief condition.

How would existing Conditions like Charm or Taunt or Rage affect Social Combat? Surely they'd have a huge impact?

andrew wrote:

The goal is that you can use both at the same time in one unified system. So picture a zoro movie where they fight, but also tant and talk with one another. That's what I aim to achieve with this next RGS evolution.

I've been kind of doing that in my games by allowing most Skill checks usually during combat – or using my chase rules. Is there a reason you didn't rely more on the existing Skill system for Social Combat?

First of all, your edits to the main post GREATLY clarify things. I mean, before obviously it made sense, from a linguistic stand point, but I'm not sure if that's the input you were looking for. :p

I will post the Social rules set if there's a possibility of constructive testing and critique that can help me adjust the numbers in the system. Right now it's the last thing that's holding up the release of Creatures from Fairy-Tale and Myth. The main sticking points are how does social combat affect combat. So we're running combats where denizens and dwellers mix combat powers and social powers. Getting the numbers right so both use a similar rune/action economy to a means to an end is what I'm working on. We'll get there.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

Anyone can play a Mental (blue) rune to initiate a social attack. It deals 1 social damage (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).The defender has an innate Social defense equal to half their Mental Trait (round up). They may also play a Mental (blue) rune to defend, reducing the Social damage by 1 (plus any equipment or power/skill effects that may boost or hinder the attack).

We tried something new last week. You play the runic symbol tied to your Social power to trigger it (same as Active powers). Base Social damage is equal to your Mental Trait, and for the defender, the base social defense is equal to their Spiritual Trait. The defender can play a rune tied to a social defense power to help counter the damage. Both attack and defend powers have metas (mostly Amplify, but there are others like Range and Abate).

A scenario that I recall from last night, my level 8 Bandrui was trying to get a Viking war-band to take on an Abbott and his crusader entourage. The Viking leader was level 12, so it wouldn't be an easy Provoke. I used a power that grants me a +1 to my Provoke attack, and I had 1 Mental trait, I also had an item that helps Provoke actions adding a +1 bonus, so my total was 3 Social damage. I have Destiny 2, so I amplified two times, dealing a total of 9 Social damage. The Viking chieftain had a Destiny of 3 and 6 Essence with a Spiritual trait of 2. He played a defend action that granted a +1 bonus and amplified it twice for a total of 9. We had a tie, and defender wins on ties, but we have a "help mechanic", where on a Social attack, 1 ally can weigh in by adding their Physical trait to the first round of Social combat by using their physical presence to drive the point home. An ally had a Physical Trait of 2 and helped bump my Social attack score to 11. Since I did at least 1 point of damage, I inflicted the Anger condition on the Vikings, with the crusaders as their target.

When a player chooses their Physical appearance, there are 3 types we've identified, but there may be more by the time this is all said and done: intimidating, charming or approachable. If I was trying to incite them to flee I would want another dweller's aid who has a high Physical trait and is intimidating. Someone who is approachable wouldn't be able to aid my effort to instill fear. However if I were trying to question the enemy, then I'd like them to come up beside me and I'd use their physical presence to boost my social score. So dwellers are forced to provide their physical appearance making the physical trait effective in certain types of Social conflicts.

dafelsheim wrote:

So, social damage is really a completely different, fourth kind of damage, then? Mental, Spiritual, Physical, and Social? Have you thought of how to balance the introduction of Social damage against how the other forms of damage are arrayed in existing publications? For instance, a lot of Powers (Active and Passive) that already exist seem like they would definitely interact with Social damage (list comes later.) Powers that deal with Mental Damage in general seem to do so, thematically, at least.

Oh, and on that note, according to page 85 of the core rulebook, wouldn't Spiritual Runes apply to Social Combat more?

See above

Suppose I had a skill like Lore: Personas where I had additional knowledge about the Viking chieftain or the Abbott, then I could add those skill ranks as a bonus. We limit the skill bonus to a single skill for expediency, otherwise looking for and trying to rationalize a huge skill stack would slow down the game too much. I am also thinking of limiting the out of combat Active power effects to a single relevant one for the exact same reason.

The formula for a Social attack would be:Social Active power + Mental Trait + Social items + string bonus + relevant skill rank + relevant out of combat effect (if not in combat) + One assist from a dweller using their Physical Trait, and then the total could be amplified if the invoker chooses to do so.

The formula for a Social defend would be:Social Active power + Spiritual Trait + Social items + string bonus + relevant skill rank + relevant out of combat effect (if not in combat) and then the total could be amplified if the invoker chooses to do so.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

Social damage targets the Rune Bag (Essence) and brings the runes down to Stun. At the end of every combat round *all* runes from stun are returned to the Rune Bag (Essence).

What if some Runes in Stun are not from Social damage?

Doesn't matter, Mental damage and Social damage have a synergy.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

The defender’s Social defense is lowered by 1 for every piece of critical information (called “strings”) the attacker may know about them (usually already known through the adventure or by using the question social action).

So this is effectively Pierce?

Rather than have addition and subtraction, we adjusted Social combat to be addition only. Strings boost attack and defense.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

Social combat introduces active powers that are social attacks and defenses. Social conditions act as either buffs or de-buffs for social interactions.

Now, this part I like a lot. I have to admit that I was a little disappointed at how little Skalds could do as far as Powers go, socially-speaking. But that also begs the question.. With Archetype Boards being static, how would any existing Archetypes access such Powers?

I plan to release a bunch of 7x7 social power boards that can be retrofitted to all legacy archetypes. So you'd get a Skald Social power board, an Ulfhednar Social combat board, etc... This means that each rune will be used to pick powers on 4 boards: active, social, passive and skill.

This sounds very Burning Wheely/Torchbearery. A player of mine just started running a Torchbearer game a few weeks ago. I really do love the whole innate Nature idea.

andrew wrote:

They might, but right now they don't. I'm in the numbers balancing game right now.

Let me know if you want any aid with that. Everyone in my gaming group have degrees in hard sciences so we can definitely crunch some numbers and do some statistics.

I will take you up on this, since I need to broaden the circle of testers to get the numbers right.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

If you have a relevant skill, you can tap into it for an additional success per rank.

Wow. This actually sounds very similar to the custom rules I've made for chases/challenges. I'll PM you those!

You can post them here, this way more people can jump into the discussion. I'll update the first post as well with more recent developments to the rules.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

Can you give me an example? Are you referring to some social out-of-combat effects? If so, same as skills, if you can rationalize how they help, you can add a +1.

Well, some examples of Active Powers that would either directly or indirectly (in my estimation) apply to Social Combat-type scenarios:

Analytical Fortress StanceAnalytical Power StanceAura AuguryAny of the Cerebral SpellsDevour ThoughtSome of the HowlsInsulting ParryMask of MockeryMental CelerityPossess OpponentPurging TiradeSoul TransferSpiritual AbortionStitch DestinyStitch KindredVisage of HorrorsBewitchmentDredge the PastUnearthly BeautyWord of CommandMesmerizing GazeMimicryShade of Night and DayShade of Piercing Eyes

Thanks for this, I think this will help anyone jumping in on the beta test.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

I have a bunch of social conditions, some bad, some good and some in the middle. The goal is to bring the emotional spectrum into the game. Your hero won't be unfeeling. If you lose your thane, you will be struck by the grief condition.

How would existing Conditions like Charm or Taunt or Rage affect Social Combat? Surely they'd have a huge impact?

This is one of my current sticking points, how does the Anger and Fury condition blend/co-exist with Rage? If Fear/Terror the opposite of Taunt? If so how do they interact.

dafelsheim wrote:

andrew wrote:

The goal is that you can use both at the same time in one unified system. So picture a zoro movie where they fight, but also tant and talk with one another. That's what I aim to achieve with this next RGS evolution.

I've been kind of doing that in my games by allowing most Skill checks usually during combat – or using my chase rules. Is there a reason you didn't rely more on the existing Skill system for Social Combat?My god. That was exhaustive.

As RGS evolves, skills will remain skills, but may get meta tags to unify them with the social and active powers. Rather than turn 24 of the 48 combat active powers into social powers, I opted to make the social powers separate, not cannibalizing the combat options for an archetype.

I will post the Social rules set if there's a possibility of constructive testing and critique that can help me adjust the numbers in the system. Right now it's the last thing that's holding up the release of Creatures from Fairy-Tale and Myth. The main sticking points are how does social combat affect combat. So we're running combats where denizens and dwellers mix combat powers and social powers. Getting the numbers right so both use a similar rune/action economy to a means to an end is what I'm working on. We'll get there.

This was my main concern and I am glad to see you're giving it all a good examination.

andrew wrote:

We tried something new last week. You play the runic symbol tied to your Social power to trigger it (same as Active powers). Base Social damage is equal to your Mental Trait, and for the defender, the base social defense is equal to their Spiritual Trait. The defender can play a rune tied to a social defense power to help counter the damage. Both attack and defend powers have metas (mostly Amplify, but there are others like Range and Abate).

I like this so far a lot.

[quote=”andrew”]A scenario that I recall from last night, my level 8 Bandrui was trying to get a Viking war-band to take on an Abbott and his crusader entourage. The Viking leader was level 12, so it wouldn't be an easy Provoke. I used a power that grants me a +1 to my Provoke attack, and I had 1 Mental trait, I also had an item that helps Provoke actions adding a +1 bonus, so my total was 3 Social damage. I have Destiny 2, so I amplified two times, dealing a total of 9 Social damage. The Viking chieftain had a Destiny of 3 and 6 Essence with a Spiritual trait of 2. He played a defend action that granted a +1 bonus and amplified it twice for a total of 9. We had a tie, and defender wins on ties, but we have a "help mechanic", where on a Social attack, 1 ally can weigh in by adding their Physical trait to the first round of Social combat by using their physical presence to drive the point home. An ally had a Physical Trait of 2 and helped bump my Social attack score to 11. Since I did at least 1 point of damage, I inflicted the Anger condition on the Vikings, with the crusaders as their target.

When a player chooses their Physical appearance, there are 3 types we've identified, but there may be more by the time this is all said and done: intimidating, charming or approachable. If I was trying to incite them to flee I would want another dweller's aid who has a high Physical trait and is intimidating. Someone who is approachable wouldn't be able to aid my effort to instill fear. However if I were trying to question the enemy, then I'd like them to come up beside me and I'd use their physical presence to boost my social score. So dwellers are forced to provide their physical appearance making the physical trait effective in certain types of Social conflicts.[/quote]

Bandrui? Abbot? I'm assuming Archetypes that are forthcoming?

In my game, I've given House Rules for Group Skill Checks that use a similar helping mechanic. The primary Dweller Wyrds vs. the set Difficulty and then the secondary Dwellers (a # set by the Norn) then each Wyrd vs. a Difficulty = the # of successes the primary Dweller scored.

My initial thought in response to the Physical help mechanic is that there is a lot of potential weird balance issues of an allied helping character just happens to have a really high Physical score. It would be weird if, say, the primary attacker had a +2 (+1 Mental, +1) power and the defender had a +5 (+4 Spiritual, +1 Power) and the attacker won because they had an allied Berserker with a synergetic Physical trait of +4.

andrew wrote:

Suppose I had a skill like Lore: Personas where I had additional knowledge about the Viking chieftain or the Abbott, then I could add those skill ranks as a bonus. We limit the skill bonus to a single skill for expediency, otherwise looking for and trying to rationalize a huge skill stack would slow down the game too much. I am also thinking of limiting the out of combat Active power effects to a single relevant one for the exact same reason.

I like this. This is how I do my challenges.

So generally speaking it favors the attacker?

[quote=”andrew”]Doesn't matter, Mental damage and Social damage have a synergy.[/quote]

So at the end of a combat round, after Clean-Up, a character has 4 Runes in Stun, 2 from Social Damage and 2 from Physical damage, ALL 4 would return to Essence?

[quote=”andrew”]I plan to release a bunch of 7x7 social power boards that can be retrofitted to all legacy archetypes. So you'd get a Skald Social power board, an Ulfhednar Social combat board, etc... This means that each rune will be used to pick powers on 4 boards: active, social, passive and skill.[/quote]

Fantastic! This was one of my BIGGEST ponderances. I am really glad there's some retroactive refitting.

andrew wrote:

I will take you up on this, since I need to broaden the circle of testers to get the numbers right.

At your disposal!

[quote=”andrew”]This is one of my current sticking points, how does the Anger and Fury condition blend/co-exist with Rage? If Fear/Terror the opposite of Taunt? If so how do they interact.[/quote]

I think a good first step to this, numerically at least, might be to actually go ahead and make the # of Intensities of Social Conditions the same as normal Conditions (4.) For Social Conditions that result from intensifying a previous once, you could just make that second intensified Social Condition the effects at max intensity?

CHASE/CHALLENGE RULESI'm not sure if you're familiar with chases from Pathfinder or D&D but I made the following rules from those as inspiration.

For each step of the chase there is a challenge (an obstacle to overcome or a goal to work towards.) Each Dweller can take one Action per step, either a Skill or an Out-of-Combat Active Power:

There will be a list of Skills given by the Norn that can be used to proceed with each step. A player can also try to justify a different Skill use. Each Dweller chooses one Skill to Wyrd with no Skill being usable by multiple Dwellers in a given step. Tally the number of successes from each Wyrd and then the sum for the step.

A player can choose an applicable Out-of-Combat Active Power to use in a given step. The number of successes a Power contributes to the challenge is equal to 1 + the maximum number of times the Power could be Amplified using a standard Wyrd of a Dweller's Destiny.

If a Dweller has any Passive Powers that apply to one of the above they receive a +1 bonus to their successes.

After all steps have been completed, total the Dwellers' successes. This determines the result of the overall chase/challenges. This may oppose another chase/challenge.

I love the concept of social combat, and it seems like it allows for a lot of creativity and role-play potential.

My issue with a clearly defined system that seems almost as extensive as regular combat is that the players already have so much to remember. A minimum of 4 things per rune, how some of the more esoteric skills work, how the different conditions work, wait I forgot generic actions exist, what do you mean jumping through my thane’s aura damages me, wait a minute I know it’s the next person’s turn now, but I just realized I should have had an extra +2 damage, +2 pierce on my last attack, wait I forgot I have a rank in that skill, etc.

I love the idea of a fleshed out alternative to combat. It encourages creative solutions, and the “strings” encourage players to really explore your world and learn everything they can about a villain or monster before going after them. But basically doubling what already has the potential to be an overwhelming amount of info for a player seems like it’ll bog down play. Moreover, from the player perspective, why should I memorize all this new stuff when we’ve already seen the GM use skill checks for a social aspect of combat? In my game, one player’s Druid noticed the night wolf in a cage match with the blacksmith’s Nanus Drake was being healed by someone in the audience. So she turned into a hawk, flew up to get a bird’s eye view, and saw it was the owner cheating. The party then worked together to confront him and to convince the owner of the establishment that this guy was casting a version of apples of Idun, and they were on a clock, since the wolf was still in the pit with the dragon and winning. The owner, once convinced, proceeded to summarily execute the cheater and the wolf. It was simple, social, high stakes, and used the rules they were already familiar and comfortable with.

Side Note: would these social powers be generic actions, accessible to anyone? Would they make up a brand new diplomat class? Would existing power boards have to be revised to accommodate the new social powers? These concerns are as significant, if not more so, than information overload.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum